Dr. Daniel Linhares - Update on Porcine Reproductive & Respiratory Syndrome (PRRS) stability studies and flash updates on PRRS detection and biosecurity studies
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
2 likes•495 views
Update on Porcine Reproductive & Respiratory Syndrome (PRRS) stability studies and flash updates on PRRS detection and biosecurity studies - Dr. Daniel Linhares, Iowa State University, Swine Health and Productivity, from the 2016 North American PRRS Symposium, December 3‐4, 2016, Chicago, Illinois, USA. More presentations at http://www.swinecast.com/2016-north-american-prrs-symposium
![Update on PRRS stability studies…
and quick updates on PRRS detection and
biosecurity
Daniel Linhares
Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine [VDPAM]
Iowa State University](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/161203prrslinhares-170220192913/85/Dr-Daniel-Linhares-Update-on-Porcine-Reproductive-Respiratory-Syndrome-PRRS-stability-studies-and-flash-updates-on-PRRS-detection-and-biosecurity-studies-1-320.jpg)
![Agenda:
Update on PRRS stability
| SHMP 1-7-4 project
| Next steps to decrease stability?
Oral fluids-based slaughter surveillance [preliminary]
Oral fluids from suckling pigs [for breeding herd monitoring]
Detecting outbreaks a few weeks earlier…
What’s new on measuring “anti-PRRS biosecurity”?
What’s on the pipeline?
Controlling PRRS
Detecting PRRS
Preventing PRRS
More PRRS…]()
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (20)
Similar to Dr. Daniel Linhares - Update on Porcine Reproductive & Respiratory Syndrome (PRRS) stability studies and flash updates on PRRS detection and biosecurity studies
Similar to Dr. Daniel Linhares - Update on Porcine Reproductive & Respiratory Syndrome (PRRS) stability studies and flash updates on PRRS detection and biosecurity studies (20)
More from John Blue
More from John Blue (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Dr. Daniel Linhares - Update on Porcine Reproductive & Respiratory Syndrome (PRRS) stability studies and flash updates on PRRS detection and biosecurity studies
- 1. Update on PRRS stability studies… and quick updates on PRRS detection and biosecurity Daniel Linhares Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine [VDPAM] Iowa State University
- 2. Agenda: Update on PRRS stability | SHMP 1-7-4 project | Next steps to decrease stability? Oral fluids-based slaughter surveillance [preliminary] Oral fluids from suckling pigs [for breeding herd monitoring] Detecting outbreaks a few weeks earlier… What’s new on measuring “anti-PRRS biosecurity”? What’s on the pipeline? Controlling PRRS Detecting PRRS Preventing PRRS More PRRS…
- 3. Couple field studies on PRRS stability… 2009-2013 study • Acutely infected breeding herds • Load + close + expose program • Agreement to test (30 litters/month) • Key demographic info: • 50% infected with 1-4-4 PRRSv • 50% prior PRRS history (3 years) • 61 farms, 16 systems 2014-2016 study • Infected breeding herds • Not required to close or to expose • Agreement to test (30 litters/month) • Key demographic info: • All infected with “1-7-4” virus • 107 farms, 5 systems PRRS control Linhares, Cano, Torremorell, Morrison. Prev Vet Med, 2013 Betlach, Linhares, Morrison. in prep.
- 4. Early TTS is possible PRRS control
- 5. 44 weeksTTS50 38 weeks TTBP50 Success rate to reach Stable Main outcomes, 2013 and 2016 studies (TTS @ last testing) Early ones: 24-28 weeks 2013 2016 18 weeks 2016 25 weeks 2013 80% 49/61 2013 62% 67/107 2016 PRRS control
- 6. Median TTS (95th confidence interval): 2013 study 38.3 (35 – 42) weeks 2016 study 44 .0 (41 – 52) weeks 2013 cohort achieved TTS sooner than 2016 herds 1/3 of 2016 herds did not reach TTS by 52 weeks TTSProbabilityPRRS control
- 7. All herds: closure was associated with faster TTSPRRS control
- 8. TTS at Birth Hunter & Morrison, 2016 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 7 12 17 22 27 32 37 PercentPositivePools Weeks Post Detection Percent PCR Positive Pools By Weeks Post Detection For All Farms TTS @ Birth Median time: 21.2 weeks Range: 8 to 32 weeks PRRSv RNA RT-PCR from blood, tail blood swabs, or placental umbilical cord serum (PUCS) Litters < 24 hrs old No cross-fostering PRRS control
- 9. Project to reach Stable: • 60 to 80% success rate • 24 to 60 weeks to reach the 4th negative test TTS and Probability to reach Stable were better in the 2009-2013 cohort (61 herds) compared to the 2014-2016 cohort (107 herds): • Herd closure? Whole-herd exposure? PRRSv itself? TTS at farrowing: • 20 weeks (best= 8wks) answer in farrowing room? PRRS control Summary data from 168 sow farms attempting to achieve stability
- 10. What else to (consistently) reduce TTS? Biosecurity (to reduce re-breaks) Boost (herd) immunity Reduce within-herd transmission PRRS control
- 11. PRRS detection Oral fluids-based slaughter surveillance Marcelo Almeida, Jeff Zimmerman, Daniel Linhares At the farm PRRS RNA Positive (PCR) PRRS RNA Negative (PCR) Oral fluids 79 (25%) 240 (75%) Serum 6 (2%) 310 (98%) Oral Fluids PRRS RNA Positive (PCR) PRRS RNA Negative (PCR) Farm 79 (25%) 240 (75%) Abattoir 33 (34%) 63 (66%)
- 12. VDL Serum OF Farm OF Abattoir Lab1 295/316 (93.35) 319/319 (100.0) 96/96 (100.0) Lab2 291/315 (92.38) 320/320 (100.0) 96/96 (100.0) Lab3 299/316 (94.62) 319/319 (100.0) 96/96 (100.0) PRRS ELISA by sample: 93% serum, 100% oral fluids were positive VDL Serum OF Farm OF Abattoir Lab1 32/32 (100.0) 32/32 (100.0) 32/32 (100.0) Lab2 32/32 (100.0) 32/32 (100.0) 32/32 (100.0) Lab3 32/32 (100.0) 32/32 (100.0) 32/32 (100.0) PRRS ELISA by group: 100% of groups were positive PRRS detection
- 13. VDL Serum OF Farm OF Abattoir Lab1 5/32 (15.63) 22/32 (68.75) 17/32 (53.13) Lab2 8/32 (25.00) 21/32 (65.63) 12/32 (37.50) Lab3 5/32 (15.63) 24/32 (75.00) 11/32 (34.37) VDL Serum OF Farm OF Abattoir Lab1 6/316 (1.90) 79/319 (24.76) 33/96 (34.38) Lab2 10/315 (3.17) 67/320 (20.94) 26/96 (27.08) Lab3 6/316 (1.90) 80/319 (25.08) 21/96 (21.88) PRRS PCR by sample: ~2% serum, ~24% Farm OF, ~28% Abattoir OF PRRS PCR by group: ~ 18% serum, ~65% Farm OF, ~40% Abattoir OF PRRS detection Serum: 97.5 – 99.1% agreement between VDLs Oral Fluids: 82.3 – 88.5% agreement between VDLs
- 14. Farm PRRS PCR OF Farm PRRS PCR serum ↑ PRRSv @ farm = ↑ PRRSv @ abattoir PRRS detection
- 15. Take home messages [preliminary] • OF easily collected at abattoir • PRRSv antibodies + SVA/PRRSv RNA can be detected on oral fluids collected at abattoir • PRRSv RNA detection: higher in OF compared to serum • Variation in agreement between labs (SVA and PRRSv PCRs) • Need to further explore farm-abattoir agreement: farm prevalence, number of ropes, pig behavior, summer vs winter conditions
- 16. Example chart to detect outbreaks using # aborts/week: Note spikes in abortions & changes in SHMP status over time VDPAM weeks PRRS detection
- 17. Increased Not increased Yes 10 (100%) 0 (0%) No 7 (0.5%) 1,381 (99.5%) Number of abortsPRRS Outbreak Increased Not increased Yes 10 (100%) 0 (0%) No 5 (0.4%) 1,353 (99.6%) Pct preweaning mortality PRRS Outbreak Increased Not increased Yes 5 (100%) 0 (0%) No 5 (0.4%) 1,363 (99.6%) Pct preweaning mortality PED Outbreak Notes: Abortion wave was also detected in one PED outbreak (1 week before changing status to PED 1) Time to detect PRRS = “zero”: PWM used to define outbreak? PRRS detection
- 18. Analytic Hierarchy Process to measure biosecurity Level 1 1. Pig movements 2. Pickup/Deliveries 3. People movement 4. Pork/food product entry 5. Manure removal 6. Domestic animals, feral swine, other wild animals and insects 7. Air and water Level 2 a. Semen delivery b. Replacement pigs c. Cull pigs from premises d. Weaning Level 3 a. Semen itself b. Semen packaging c. Vehicle and driver A) Structure biosecurity risk by categories of events (Holtkamp) B) Relative importance of each category C) Relative importance of sub-categories 0.449 0.028 0.189 0.052 0.125 0.069 0.089 1.00 0.23 0.57 0.12 0.08 1.00 0.77 0.08 0.15 1.00 Frequency of events * risk of events = Score Gustavo Silva, Derald Holtkamp, Daniel Linhares PRRS prevention
- 19. Analytic Hierarchy Process to measure biosecurity A) Structure biosecurity risk by categories of events (Holtkamp) B) Relative importance of each category C) Relative importance of sub-categories Gustavo Silva, Derald Holtkamp, Daniel Linhares PRRS prevention Pilot data, 30 farms: Score was positively correlated (0.65) with frequency of outbreaks. Number of PRRS outbreaks, last 5 years Finalscore
- 20. Description of biosecurity aspects of herds with low or high PRRS incidence and comparison within and between production systems Linhares, Holtkamp, Morrison, Arruda, Silva & Vilalta density # key events selected practices Infra- structure Differences, commonalities? Trends? Scores associated with frequency outbreaks? PRRS prevention
- 21. Thank you: Daniel Linhares DVM MBA PhD VDPAM, Iowa State University Linhares@iastate.edu http://field-prrs.blogspot.com/ Abattoir study: Dr Dion Dr Donovan Dr Murray Dr Wiseman Dr Sundberg
- 22. Evaluation of methods for oral fluid collection on due-to-wean piglets Marcelo Almeida and Daniel Linhares Source: Yeske-Livermore, L (2014) Source: Graham, J (2013) PRRS detection
- 23. Factors associated with obtaining oral fluids from suckling pigs: (Marcelo Almeida) Piglet age: 3 wks old pigs more active than younger pigs Time of the day: the earlier it was the rope exposure, the higher it was the success rate (Best ~ 6 AM; Poor ≥ 8 AM) Substrate: peanut butter slightly improved success rate (extra work) Rope height from floor: better when rope is close to floor Family sampling: superior (>80%) than litter sampling (~40%) Prior training: improved the litter sampling success rate (+20%). PRRS detection
- 24. Litter Sampling Family Sampling Dr Marcelo Almeida PRRS detection
- 25. 10% 90% CTRL-FAMILY/CTRL-LITTER 20% 80% CTRL-LITTER/CTRL-LITTER 15.07 ± 11.08 mL 14.42 ± 13.17 mL 2.35 ± 1.87 mL 3.44 ± 2.68 mL 4.13 ± 2.98 mL 3.63 ± 1.58 mL SuccessCriterion=0.5mL=91.66%Success 100% PEANUT-FAMILY/PEANUT-FAMILY 100% CTRL-FAMILY/CTRL-FAMILY 10% 90% PEANUT-FAMILY/PEANUT-LITTER 10% 90% PEANUT-LITTER/PEANUT-LITTER 30% 70% NO TRAINING/PEANUT-LITTER 40% 60% NO TRAINING/CONTROL-LITTER 4.70 ± 4.11 mL 4.87 ± 2.23 mL
- 26. Thank you: Daniel Linhares DVM MBA PhD VDPAM, Iowa State University Linhares@iastate.edu http://field-prrs.blogspot.com/ Abattoir study: Dr Dion Dr Donovan Dr Murray Dr Wiseman Dr Sundberg
Editor's Notes
- Collaboratively, we are doing good but not great with TTS.
- Population of herds level: best herds start testing negative ~ 12; problem if not by 20. Production should be recovered by 20 weeks Success rate under 80%: not good result. TTBP: new study:: handful of herds using LVI- lesson learned from 2013 cohort. Not silver bullets, but do have enough data to interpret / better define success/goals for PRRS control strategies.
- Collaboratively, we are doing good but not great with TTS.
- System D had the multiplier become infected. So gilts all arrived in GDU already infected. They also have some batch farrowing and parity seg that helped them.